Help me understand the Russian Collusion angle.

Trump Jr. took a meeting with an unknown person who claimed to have dirt on DJT's political rival. It turns out the person he met with was Russian.
It also turns out (allegedly) that nothing transpired, and no damning evidence was presented. But in all that, I don't understand the crime at all.
In politics, dirt on your opponent is gold. You could see it in every bombshell that came out against Trump. He groped women, he raped bunches of
women, he cheated people out of their land. All that was dirt that someone had and allowed it to be brought to his opponents. I didn't see anyone
crying collusion when all that happened.

But if "Russia" is involved, it's different?

The "Trump Dossier" was compiled by a Brit, who did so because of a GOP (see also John McCain) operative looking for dirt on Trump. Afterwords it
was passed on to the DNC to be used as dirt on Trump. Amazingly, it was largely if not complete lies and garbage. But the fact still remains that it
was provided by a NON American entity. Since it wasn't Russia, it's all good?

Show me where in our laws, it states that political opponents cannot receive intel on their opponent from Russia, or other sources.

To date, this is the entirety of the Russian Collusion angle, and it was fully admitted by Trump Jr.

So the issue at hand is not about simply digging up dirt on a the opposition, nobody has a problem with that.

Rather the issue, question or allegation however you want to think about it, at least as I see it is this; Did the trump campaign knowing collude with
a hostile foreign state to subvert American democracy. Most of the information that is being discussed regarding Russia came though illegal means,
hacking into a DNC server then leaking the details of it via Wikileaks is a pretty serious crime. Now if this was all taking place as part of some
kind of deal between the Trump campaign and Russia then we are looking at something even more serious (now that is worse case type stuff)

As is often the case in incidents like this its actually not so much the crime or possible crime but rather its the cover up. Trump could be facing
charges of obstruction of justice for his handling of Comey for example. With Trump Jn he could land him self in trough because he met with a
individual who it seems may have been working for a hostile foreign government attempting to subvert American democracy. The big question for me is
why did he not disclose this meeting as soon as the allegations about Russia began to surface. There are multiple videos you can watch online of
Trumps team denying any contact with Russians throughout the campaign, Trump jn should really haves spoken up and prevented that false narrative from
starting. That really is the big thing, and it seems to be what is being looked at. Remember after a grand jury is convened it usually leads to a
conviction.

I would say the big thing in understanding the Russian collusion angle is that its not so much that collusion is a crime rather its the cover up of it
that could prove to have been criminal.

Its also important to remember that this is in the context of a lot of other Russian links, such as Sessions having to recuse himself of the
investigation, Paul Manafort and Flynn, even the questions now being raised about Trump himself and his connections to organised Russian crime.

All of that before we even get to the Steel dossier that you ask about in your OP. There are a few differences between the Steel dossier and the
meeting that Trump jn attended. The biggest one really being that Steel was acting as a private citizen working for a private company that was paid to
carry out the research, there is also nothing to suggest that in collection the information for the dossier there were any illegal activities. Its
also important to realise that the dossier was handed over to the American intelligence services who briefed both Obama and Trump on it, there was
much more transparency.

I think its also interesting to note today that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have said they want to sit down and talk to Steel about
he document and have said they are willing to travel to London to speak with him. While the document has in no way been verified I would not be so
quick as to dismiss it as a bunch of lies as its been treated very seriously by the intelligence community.

I quite often see all this stuff about how there is no evidence that has been presented to show any crime has been committed. I would counter that by
saying that although no evidence has been made public so far, I think it is fair to say that does not in itself mean absence of evidence. Give it
another 6 months or so and I think his will all start to unravel.

so all of your hate and anger at the moment is based on hope and conspiracy theory? The facts that we know are that Trump Jr. took a meeting and it
turns out the meeting was with a Russian. It has yet to be proven that she was working for the government, or that she ever had dirt on Clinton, only
that they met.

You seem to think that all the good evidence is hidden away, but the MSM seems to know every detail due to leaks, I find it very hard to believe that
anything in this investigation could remain secret due to all the leaks. But I do like your timeline. 6 months would be good to finally have a damn
answer on this joke. If Trump is guilty, hang his ass, if it's found out that the DNC made all this up, they need to to identified, jailed, and fined
for all the missed opportunities the US had to make some real progress, but was pre-occupied with boogymen.

so all of your hate and anger at the moment is based on hope and conspiracy theory?

I guess you could call it a "conspiracy theory" however I think due to the connotations that go with that it kind of undermines the seriousness of the
situation. This whore Russia thing is currently the subject to 4 investigations including the special council the entire thing is being taken very
seriously. This is not a conspiracy theory like 9/11 rather this is more like Watergate, I think its probably going to end up being much bigger than
Watergate however. That is just my opinion however.

The facts that we know are that Trump Jr. took a meeting and it turns out the meeting was with a Russian. It has yet to be proven that she was working
for the government, or that she ever had dirt on Clinton, only that they met.

I don't really want to get into all of the connections but the meeting had "Russian Spies have dirt on Clinton come have a look" written all over it,
the email that was release even said it was regarding dirt on Clinton. This meeting like it or not is a massive revelation that could just be the
start of it. If this was something as trivial as Trump supporters try to make out then it would not have lead to the convening of a grand jury.

You seem to think that all the good evidence is hidden away, but the MSM seems to know every detail due to leaks, I find it very hard to believe that
anything in this investigation could remain secret due to all the leaks.

I see your point however when it comes to the investigation that really matter, the special council lead by Mulner, there has actually been very
little in the way of leaks. Sure the White House is leaking like a sieve but I think that is a separate issue. For example his conversations between
world leaders that leaked his nothing to do with Russia.

IMO its is a cover ...To a much much bigger situation that is going to come out and they are very afraid .Because of that fear they can't think right
and every time they look into their bag of deception all they can find is Russia/Trump China/Kim Or what ever else is going on in the world . They
should just come clean but they cant and they are afraid . Fear is a very powerful force .

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
So the issue at hand is not about simply digging up dirt on a the opposition, nobody has a problem with that.

Rather the issue, question or allegation however you want to think about it, at least as I see it is this; Did the trump campaign knowing collude with
a hostile foreign state to subvert American democracy. Most of the information that is being discussed regarding Russia came though illegal means,
hacking into a DNC server then leaking the details of it via Wikileaks is a pretty serious crime. Now if this was all taking place as part of some
kind of deal between the Trump campaign and Russia then we are looking at something even more serious (now that is worse case type stuff)

Lots of if's maybe's and could've been's in your post.
It's basically a rehash of months of media speculation.

There is nothing illegal in Trump Jr meeting to gather dirt on Hillary - even if it was Putin himself supplying the information.

If Putin himself had called up and said "I've just hacked the DNC and I have some info i want to share with you" that STILL would not be an illegal
act.

The question was about whether anything was illegal about the meeting, not an invitation to rehash a years worth of speculation.

If Putin himself had called up and said "I've just hacked the DNC and I have some info i want to share with you" that STILL would not be an illegal
act.

would that not make him a accessory after the crime?

Can you not at least agree that with the events of last week it now seems to be that there could be some criminal charges to be brought against
members of the Trump team?

I would also highlight that I have said in that post you have quoted that although collusion might not have been a crime in itself the cover up of
Russian collusion could very well prove to be the crime.

If Putin himself had called up and said "I've just hacked the DNC and I have some info i want to share with you" that STILL would not be an illegal
act.

would that not make him a accessory after the crime?

Can you not at least agree that with the events of last week it now seems to be that there could be some criminal charges to be brought against
members of the Trump team?

I would also highlight that I have said in that post you have quoted that although collusion might not have been a crime in itself the cover up of
Russian collusion could very well prove to be the crime.

Why would it make him an accessory after the crime?
Are newspaper journalists committing criminal acts when they receive leaked classified information?

IF the purpose of the grand jury (which by the way was not impanelled last week - that was faked news) is to look at the Trump Jr meeting, it is more
likely to be to obtain more details, including any follow ups or further communications that Trump Jr may not have revealed.

The crime would be if Trump Jr actually helped someone to commit the crime of obtaining the information - for which we have no evidence of. In fact,
the email chain he did release would suggest he had no knowledge at all about what he might be getting. For those looking at the emails impartially
it is far more on an indication that there was never any collusion.

If Putin himself had called up and said "I've just hacked the DNC and I have some info i want to share with you" that STILL would not be an illegal
act.

I made the same point in one of my previous threads.

If you simply replace the name Trump with Obama and were to apply it to everything hanging over Trump regarding Russia then I do not think there is
much doubt that Trump supporters would be calling for Obama to be hung as a traitor.

They have became clouded by their political views, there is a massive cognitive dissonance taking place, they support Trump yet have to face all of
this stuff coming out about it.

Personal opinion: On the evidence presented thus far (in the media, so caveats apply!) the entire "Russian Collusion" thing is a bad case of Jim
Garrison Syndrome. In this form of delusion, every single personal contact, however fleeting, is potentially significant, and even living on a street
near another contact is itself suspicious. Once you have convinced yourself that everyone is a potential suspect, you are at liberty to pick and
choose, because they all connect somehow with each other in the end.

This same sort of Six Degrees Of Kevin Bacon delusion is behind the 'Russian Collusion' nonsense and the 'Clinton Death List' nonsense.

All that could change overnight in the 'Russian Collusion' affair, but on the evidence thus far it looks like a lucky dip of an investigation in which
any charge will be presented to the public as a success.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.